Researchers have come up with an unusual proposal to slow, or even reverse, the cognitive decline that comes with old age: small, daily doses of cannabis extract.

Research on cannabis use by adolescents has found compelling evidence that regular, heavy use can impair the memory. But the impact of the drug on older people’s brains has been far less well studied.

Writing in the journal Nature Medicine, the scientists describe how they gave a month-long course of daily THC to mice aged two months, one year, and 18 months. The mice were then tested to see how fast they solved a water maze, and how quickly they recognised familiar objects such as mice they had met before.

Without the drug, the younger mice aced the tests, while the older ones struggled. But infusions of THC had a dramatic impact on both groups. The performance of the younger mice plummeted on THC, while older mice improved so much that their scores matched those of healthy drug-free young mice. The benefits lasted for weeks after the infusions ended. None of the mice displayed the strange effects one might expect from doses of THC.

“These results reveal a profound, long-lasting improvement of cognitive performance resulting from a low dose of THC treatment in mature and old animals,” the scientists write. The boost in brain function was linked to an apparent restoration of gene expression in the brain to more youthful levels.

The German team believes that the drug works by stimulating what is known as the endocannabinoid system, a biochemical pathway that becomes less active with age in mice, humans and other animals. “I’m sure that what we are seeing are the long-term consequences of normalising the system,” Bilkei-Gorzo said.

Lots of very valuable research has been slowed or stopped in its tracks by the misguided efforts of our governments to fight recreational drug use. Wonder if this is yet another example.

David Nutt, the former government drugs adviser and professor of neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London, said he was not surprised at the potential for THC to improve memory in old age. “The key question now is does the same apply to humans? Clearly this needs to be tested, but it will not be possible in the UK due to the ridiculous restrictions on cannabis research occasioned by its being a schedule 1 drug.”

Elasto, as a rule of thumb, almost all nutritional science studies are bullshit. Come back when you have multiple studies that have more than 30 college students. I'm aware that this is unfair because pot is restricted, but still, take any news with a grain of salt.

sardia wrote:Elasto, as a rule of thumb, almost all nutritional science studies are bullshit. Come back when you have multiple studies that have more than 30 college students. I'm aware that this is unfair because pot is restricted, but still, take any news with a grain of salt.

This was a mouse study, if that wasn't clear. Getting people to come in, smoke a joint, and then complete some tasks is also very different from getting people to be honest about what they ate for two months.

There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

Liri wrote:This was a mouse study, if that wasn't clear. Getting people to come in, smoke a joint, and then complete some tasks is also very different from getting people to be honest about what they ate for two months.

The unreliability of animal experimentation across a wide range of areas undermines scientific arguments in favor of the practice. Additionally, I show how animal experimentation often significantly harms humans through misleading safety studies, potential abandonment of effective therapeutics, and direction of resources away from more effective testing methods. The resulting evidence suggests that the collective harms and costs to humans from animal experimentation outweigh potential benefits and that resources would be better invested in developing human-based testing methods.

With regards to drug testing, sure, but there is still plenty of basic biology that is worthwhile to discover from animals.

There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

sardia wrote:Elasto, as a rule of thumb, almost all nutritional science studies are bullshit. Come back when you have multiple studies that have more than 30 college students. I'm aware that this is unfair because pot is restricted, but still, take any news with a grain of salt.

Of course. Which is why it needs testing on people. Which is why it's stupid that it's so hard to do so. Also see promising studies of the effects of ecstasy and LSD on depression and PTSD etc.

Puritanical fear of people accidently enjoying themselves too much is getting in the way of hard science. Imagine if painkiller research had been held back for decades because of fear of abuse... That's the situation we're in now with many of these substances.

Also, remember that cannabis is legal or quasi-legal in quite a few countries now, so it's bonkers that UK scientists effectively can't do trials on it!